Site Search Navigation

Search NYTimes.com

Loading...

See next articles

See previous articles

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Supported by

Giuliani Takes on Edwards

By Marc Santora May 23, 2007 6:25 pmMay 23, 2007 6:25 pm

Rudolph W. Giuliani found a useful foil in Ron Paul during the recent Republican debate, and now he’s taking on a Democrat — John Edwards — to make his points on the national security front during an appearance today in New Hampshire.

“One of the democratic Presidential candidates today gave a speech in New York and the speech that he gave suggested that the global war on terror was no more than a slogan of George Bush’s,” Mr. Giuliani told a gathering of employees of an insurance company in Keene. “I understand the zeal and the overzealousness that some of these people have to attack George Bush. It comes out a of a political process,” he said. “I think it is wrong. I think it doesn’t put George Bush’s presidency in proper perspective.”

Mr. Giuiani has often praised President Bush for the way he responded to America’s being attacked on Sept. 11, putting the country on what he calls “offense.”

Domestically, Mr. Giuliani defines offense as the use of things like the Patriot Act and aggressive interrogation techniques.

Mr. Giuliani also framed the current fighting in Iraq as part of being on “offense” against terrorism.

In four separate events across New Hampshire, each time Iraq was raised, he sought to put it in the context of the region and the dire consequences of failure there.

“You can not view Iraq in a vacuum,” he said while talking to employees at a cabinet factory in Claremont. If America fails now and withdraws troops before stability is brought about, he said, the military would likely have to be sent back there soon because of the chaos that would ensue.

Mr. Giuliani defined success in Iraq as a country that is not a “breeding ground for terrorism” with a government that is not unduly controlled by neighboring Iran.

Mr. Giuliani said that Mr. Edwards was in “denial” about the terrorist threat.

“When you go so far as to suggest the global war on terror is a bumper sticker or a slogan, it kind of makes the point that I have been making over and over again,” he said, unprompted. “That the democrats, or at least some of them are in denial. There is not a global war on terror because of George Bush.”

And what are Guiliani’s great credentials on foreign policy? Admiration for Bush’s strategy of creating terrorists where there were none. Guiliani is in denial about the failure of Bush’s war and the Republican enablers that allowed Bush to drain the treasury to fill Haliburton’s coffers. The British dropped the slogan a while ago knowing that it was a political excuse to strip the rule of law from US citizens. Edwards is just exposing the truth.

Giuliani is supporting and defending a failed policy of Bush. Edward is right the war on terror become a bumper sticker or slogan when republicans try over and over again to use it to intimidate Americans into voting for them. Overall i believe that Obama is the best candidate with a great vision and skill to lead us out of the mess we are currently facing in iraq. Also, he is the only one who can reach out to the U.N in mobilizing the world in an effort to finish off the war….

Is it too early to say I am a bit tired with Mr. Giuliani and how he somehow was the saviour of New York on 9/11 by the mere fact he was the Mayor on that date? I can surely understand his role in expressing the remorse all New Yorkers were feeling but he is far from being a leader. All of this grandstanding is more than presumptious.

Before we invaded Iraq, it was a buffer against Iranian Islamism in which religious terrorists were considered enemies of the secular (albeit autocratic) regime. To put that into words Mr. Giuliani might understand: before we invaded Iraq, it was ruled by a very mean man who posed us no threat. Now that President Bush “went on the offense” in Iraq, it is an anarchic failed state riven by sectarian conflict and multiparty civil war, not to mention a “breeding ground for terrorists.” Perhaps those who have been unswervingly wrong about everything since Day 1 should stop making suggestions.

Right on Joe Brown… The war on terror is an abstract, unfocused and lacking in all particulars. It’s a war without a true target. To claim terrorist must be fought anywhere is to speak in ignorance. Identify terrorist first stupid! Stop listening to O’Reilly for a moment. Furthermore, even when we do know where terrorist are located, (see Bin Laden in the mountains of the tora bora), we still can’t get them. So all of this “global war on terror,” one size fits all rhetoric by Giuliani makes no sense. Rudy is more concerned with winning over war hawks, highlighting his 9-11 “leadership,” and maintaining the propaganda campaign than speaking the truth. Even the so called “war on drugs or gangs” was more limited than this worldwide war on terror… And if we look at our prison population, level of gang activity-high school dropouts, and the now constant bombings, it becomes clear that these “wars” are not strategies, not plans of action. They simply thrive on propoganda and people so committed to these “wars” that they can no longer walk and chew gum. Peace.

Where did you get your PhD? What does the statement “Giuliani is a crossdressing idiot?” contribute to substantive discussion? Suppose I point out to you that Hillary Clinton took campaign donations from one of the most wanted fugitives in the world, Ray Jinnah?

As the country learns more and more of what Giuliani is like, he doesn’t stand a chance. The press should cover the fact that he tried to get a third term out of 9/11. When that did not work, he tried for a six month extension of his term. The law prevailed, and he was term-limited. Rudy will do anything, will attempt to violate any law to get what he wants. He is among the lowest of the low. He is really another Bush in character. He has milked 9/11 for everything it’s worth, not that I can say that the other politicians haven’t done the same thing. This guy takes the cake altogether. Exploiting 9/11 is beyond the pale. Not one of them deserves any real respect.

Kate and her staff are careful in the selection of topics. They will give us a chance to respond at a given moment. Most of us would jump at a chance to discuss Fredo, Goodling, McNulty, the bedside visit, the price of gas, more immigration, the war bill and all the other things that bother us ad nauseum…. But this is their forum.

Be patient. You will get your chance.

PS.. what sets this blog apart is the willingness to allow serious debate when the occasion arises. Recent good threads include the immigration debate and the first few round of the Iraq bill. Well reasoned essays are posted which are long enough to make real argument.

I, for one, will defend this blog, and its many denizens.

BTW Giuliani is trying to knock out Edwards as he feels he is a greater threat than Clinton or Obama (absent the possibility of the return of Gore). I guess that goes to Rudy’s innate belief that neither a woman nor a person of color could challenge him.

Too many bellyachers in here that are obsessed with the fact that George Bush (God bless him) is our president. Get over it. You lost to Bush twice. And with the lot that you have running for president in ’08, it’s likely you the whining Democrats will lose again. There are some strong leaders on the Republican side of the ledger. And a couple of lightweights — one of them Bill Clinton’s wife — on the other. Unless the Democrats put someone out there who’s electable — Hillary and Barack are not — then they will lose again. And then, horror of horrors, we’ll have four more years of whining Democrats saying they got screwed in the election and that our new president Giuliani, Romney, or McCain, is stupid, not very bright or enlightened and, of course, is out to screw the little guy … blah blah blah.

Side by side like that, it is so apparent that the younger Sen. Edwards has not had plastic surgery, but Giuliani has had a lot of work done.

Anyway, Rudeboy has absolutely no clue about terrorism or any military matters. He got an exemption from the draft during Vietnam, and has never done anything military. He happened to be in NYC, like me, during the tragedy, but clearly learned much less about terrorism than I did. Know who he picked as his primary terrorism advisor? That’s right, Judith Nathan, ex-nursing student.

And if he claims that over 2/3 of the nation is in denial, do ya think he might be in denial? Keep in mind he did have plastic surgery and used to have a comb-over that looked like a tarantula grasping an ostrich egg, which are two pretty clear signs in a male of strong denial.

Giuliani repeats the Great Lie about the “war on terror.” It’s not the “war on terror”–if it were, we would have focussed our efforts in Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan where the Taliban and Al Quaeda were based in 2001.

No–it was an excuse to (1) invade Iraq, our realpolitik bulwark againt Iran–something Cheney warned AGAINST in 1991, and (2) use it as an excuse to gut the Constitution and make the Republican Party the ONLY party. Basically, the planners of this took a page from Hitler’s 1933 playbook, manipulating fear to give them power.

Giuliani does no differently. And look at the quality of his appointments–in two words, Bernard Kerik. And look at his sanctimony and hypocrisy.

There was no focussed plan of action–only manipulated fear. And in our own efforts, we are becoming our enemy.

How much more proof does Giuliani have to give that he is out of touch with the results of our failed foreighn policy or world events?

What is his opinion regarding Halliburton has relocated to Dubai after collecting 20 BILLION of our tax contributions?

What is the problem with that? Well for starters the GAO is investigating the disappearance of about $12 Billion. Should it turn out that there was hanky panky (don’t forget you and I paid those taxes), the joke is on us because there is ‘NO EXTRADITION PROTOCOLS” between Dubai and the US.
Second, they took the money and ran, so that means they don’t have to pay taxes on the loot!

Nifty move no?

Do you think the people that own stock in the armament industries are the least bit sorry about the nearly 4,000 american and 600,000 iraqi lives lost? Why would Rudy have any concern for these figures?

I am a life-long Republican but I’m afraid that all of the Republican Party’s front runners simply do not comprehend what radicalizes people and causes them to turn to terrorism. My guess is they are either fairly ignorant about terrorism or they are simply pandering to a base of fearful and ignorant voters. God forbid, should one of them get elected, that they might continue to make policy based on such ridiculous notions like fighting terrorism involves full scale wars. As long as we continue to pour money into fighting terrorists and do nothing to address what radicalizes people to become terrorists, the numbers of potential terrorists will continue to grow. According to our own government’s estimates the number of al Qaeda linked terrorists has risen from 20,000 when we invade Iraq to over 50,000 today. Wars grab headlines and are easier to explain to a fairly ignorant public, than the strategies and tactics that should be used to counter terroism and dry up terrorists sources for new recruits and sympathizers. I am appalled at their apparent ignorance regarding successful counter-terrorism measures and at a loss regarding how to get through to many Republican candidates, legislators and voters the fact that wars and torture only serve to strengthen terrorist organizations. These tactics only feed our need to get revenge but I’m afraid many Republicans don’t want to acknowledge this fact and would prefer to ignore many others as well.

President Obama drew criticism on Thursday when he said, “we don’t have a strategy yet,” for military action against ISIS in Syria. Lawmakers will weigh in on Mr. Obama’s comments on the Sunday shows.Read more…